Retired Byu Religion Professor Brian Hauglid on Rfm Podcast

[Fair Dinkum]

Retired July 1st BYU Religion Professor Brian Hauglid,  author of several books on the Book of Abraham, has just been interviewed in an  interesting interview on the  RFM Podcast.  Although I was surprised that he would decide to be interviewed on this particular podcast that some may find less than faith promoting, I do find many of his assertions fascinating and thought provoking.

His views have strayed away from a traditional view of the Book of Abraham and brings into question many of the views I once held towards the Book of Abraham.

I'm curious if others have also listened to this podcast and what your thought might be concerning his approach to the Book of Abraham.

Also I do find it interesting that Dr. Hauglid, a member of the church team that published the Joseph Smith Papers and authored several books on the Book of Abraham,  felt it necessary to wait unto his retirement had been funded before he could speak freely in public concerning his true beliefs.  I find it sad that he had to wait until being retired before he could be his true self and speak freely.

 

 

Edited July 7, 2020 by Fair Dinkum

[CV75]

14 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Retired July 1st BYU Religion Professor Brian Hauglid,  author of several books on the Book of Abraham, has just been interviewed in an  interesting interview on the  RFM Podcast.  Although I was surprised that he would decide to be interviewed on this particular podcast that some may find less than faith promoting, I do find many of his assertions fascinating and thought provoking.

His views have strayed away from a traditional view of the Book of Abraham and brings into question many of the views I once held towards the Book of Abraham.

I'm curious if others have also listened to this podcast and what your thought might be concerning his approach to the Book of Abraham.

Also I do find it interesting that Dr. Hauglid, a member of the church team that published the Joseph Smith Papers and authored several books on the Book of Abraham,  felt it necessary to wait unto his retirement had been funded before he could speak freely in public concerning his true beliefs.  I find it sad that he had to wait until being retired before he could be his true self and speak freely.

Some people would do anything for money... not that he did.  Maybe it is just a function of time and his dedicated priority to teach students.

[Calm]

21 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

felt it necessary to wait unto his retirement had been funded before he could speak freely in public concerning his true beliefs.  I find it sad that he had to wait until being retired before he could be his true self and speak freely.

No one forced him to stay employed by the Church. He chose to put his retirement funding before his “true self”. 

[CA Steve]

4 minutes ago, Calm said:

No one forced him to stay employed by the Church. He chose to put his retirement funding before his “true self”. 

This a quite harsh Calm. Most of us work for someone else and most of us would probably like to see things done differently in the organization where we work, but how many of us are going to risk our livelihood, our families security and any future employment by publicly expressing our opinions about our employer?

 

 

 

[Fair Dinkum]

14 minutes ago, Calm said:

No one forced him to stay employed by the Church. He chose to put his retirement funding before his “true self”. 

I'm sympathetic to his finacial needs.  Knowing that he would probably face some action from BYU were he to do this interviewer before retiring, it makes perfect sense that he would wait until he retired.  But I do find it sad that he would face some form of action for speaking his mind.

[churchistrue]

17 minutes ago, Calm said:

No one forced him to stay employed by the Church. He chose to put his retirement funding before his “true self”. 

I haven't listened to all of it, but I don't think he said anything relative to the BoA he hasn't said over the past few years. He disagrees with Gee, but he's not taking a critical approach, imho. The last little bit of the interview he mentioned something vaguely about stepping away from church activity. Is that what you mean? I have to admit, I was a little bummed about that.  

 

[rodheadlee]

 Do you have a link to the pod cast? Could you discuss some of his views?

[Fair Dinkum]

Important to note that Bro Hauglid was also one of the authors of the Book of Abraham Church Essay and a contributing member of the Maxwell Institute AKA F.A.R.M.S as recently as a year ago. This man has Mormon Gravitas

Edited July 8, 2020 by Fair Dinkum

[Fair Dinkum]

14 minutes ago, rodheadlee said:

 Do you have a link to the pod cast? Could you discuss some of his views?

I'm only an hour into this 3 hour podcast. A lot of the podcast, at least the part I've listened to, relates to Hauglid's conflicting views with John Gee's view related to the KEP/AEP and their relation ship to the translation of the Book of Abraham.  Hauglid's view have changed, he now views and he makes a strong argument supported with historical diary entrees by JS, that Smith continued to translate well into March 1842.  If true this would completely undermine the Lost Scroll theory promoted by Gee. 

Gee's Lost Scroll Theory rests on the premises that all of the BoA translation was completed in mid 1835 and that the KEP was an independent effort by Smith's scribes to re engineer his translation and was not in any manner connected to the translation.  Hauglid feels that the historical record supports the KEP being the directly connected to with the translation of the BoA.

The direct impact as I understand each argument is that IF the KEP is connected to the BoA translation it undermines the BoA as a translation of an ancient record and exposes the process as a imaginary work of Joseph Smith.

 

https://radiofreemormon.org/2020/07/radio-free-mormon-184-the-brian-hauglid-interview/

Edited July 7, 2020 by Fair Dinkum

[Kenngo1969]

10 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

... Hauglid's view have changed, he now views and he makes a strong argument supported with historical diary entrees [sic] by JS, that Smith continued to translate well into March 1842.  If true this would completely undermine the Lost Scroll theory promoted by Gee. ...

Joseph Smith authored a cookbook?  Huh.   Who knew?

I wonder if my testimony would be affected if I were to try any of the recipes?

(Sorry.   Couldn't resist! )

[Calm]

1 hour ago, CA Steve said:

This a quite harsh Calm. Most of us work for someone else and most of us would probably like to see things done differently in the organization where we work, but how many of us are going to risk our livelihood, our families security and any future employment by publicly expressing our opinions about our employer?

 

 

 

I am not disregarding the huge pressure...chances are I would keep quiet and continue working if I had 7 years left before retirement if there were no other decent jobs available, but the phrasing of the comment was that he was forced to keep his mouth shut somehow when it was a simple pragmatic choice made by him. 
 

Though I don’t think I would within a week of retirement choose to publicize what I saw as faults.  If I accepted their money by my own choice, I think I would show enough respect to not turn around and immediately criticize them. 
 

If they were detrimental enough that I thought they were harming others and that is why I chose to speak up, I would be ashamed to take their money and would likely have quit.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Calm

[CA Steve]

9 minutes ago, Calm said:

I am not disregarding the huge pressure...chances are I would keep quiet and continue working if I had 7 years left before retirement if there were no other decent jobs available, but the phrasing of the comment was that he was forced to keep his mouth shut somehow when it was a simple pragmatic choice made by him. 

I do not believe that is a fair characterization of what he said at all. Have you listened to the interview? Nowhere does he say he was forced to keep his mouth shut, though it is quite a long podcast.

 

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

Though I don’t think I would within a week of retirement choose to publicize what I saw as faults.  If I accepted their money by my own choice, I think I would show enough respect to not turn around and immediately criticize them. 

I think to be clear here, the criticisms he offered were not directed at the church or BYU but rather at the work of specific people, so he is not criticizing the people paying him. What  is also clear here is that he has faced the same types of public criticisms too. 

 

13 minutes ago, Calm said:

If they were detrimental enough that I thought they were harming others and that is why I chose to speak up, I would be ashamed to take their money and would likely have quit.

Again he is not taking money from people who he believed were harming others. 

 

[Calm]

1 hour ago, churchistrue said:

I haven't listened to all of it, but I don't think he said anything relative to the BoA he hasn't said over the past few years. He disagrees with Gee, but he's not taking a critical approach, imho. The last little bit of the interview he mentioned something vaguely about stepping away from church activity. Is that what you mean? I have to admit, I was a little bummed about that.  

 

I am just responding to the comment he couldn’t be his true self.  I haven’t listened to it and likely won’t as don’t like podcasts  

If he has been his true self in the past, good for him (sincerely as I recognize that can be hard in a religious setting with people’s expectations) and if he hasn’t criticized the church or whatever in any new way since his very recent retirement, but is simply repeating what he said before, I don’t see an issue. 
 

I would have issues with anyone (not saying this is his scenario, just being clear where I draw lines being crossed) willing to take money for work from an employer, who then undermines that work immediately after retiring showing they disapproved of it while being paid for it, but kept quiet. If months or years passed and new info was learned and then they became critical, that is a very different scenario in my view. 

Edited July 8, 2020 by Calm

[Robert F. Smith]

2 hours ago, Fair Dinkum said:

........................................

Also I do find it interesting that Dr. Hauglid, a member of the church team that published the Joseph Smith Papers and authored several books on the Book of Abraham,  felt it necessary to wait unto his retirement had been funded before he could speak freely in public concerning his true beliefs.  I find it sad that he had to wait until being retired before he could be his true self and speak freely.

 

1 hour ago, Calm said:

No one forced him to stay employed by the Church. He chose to put his retirement funding before his “true self”. 

 

1 hour ago, CA Steve said:

This a quite harsh Calm. Most of us work for someone else and most of us would probably like to see things done differently in the organization where we work, but how many of us are going to risk our livelihood, our families security and any future employment by publicly expressing our opinions about our employer?

Actually, Hauglid told us what he thought already last year, including on this board.  There is no surprise here, and nothing new.  And the LDS Church did not take preemptive action against him, though it clearly could have.

What would be interesting would be a substantive discussion of his claims (many of which are ad hominem).

[Calm]

17 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

do not believe that is a fair characterization of what he said at all

Good to know. I will take your opinion and churchistrue as my expectations at this point. I am glad to hear he was able to live as his “true self”. I think it sad when people make choices that limit them in such ways though I realize I speak from a place of high privilege since I never had to worry about feeding my kids or having medical insurance (though we did and do worry for several months when our daughter turned 26 and every 3 years since then as we have to get her reapproved on ours).  My husband when he ran into conflict with his employer of 15 years (University of Calgary...they were gutting the program) chose to find a new employer for his last 15.  Thankfully UVU hasn’t done anything he feels in much conflict with, they promised him a new office and didn’t follow through on that, but that is a comfort, not a moral issue. 

Edited July 8, 2020 by Calm

[Calm]

1 hour ago, Fair Dinkum said:

I'm sympathetic to his finacial needs.  Knowing that he would probably face some action from BYU were he to do this interviewer before retiring, it makes perfect sense that he would wait until he retired.  But I do find it sad that he would face some form of action for speaking his mind.

What is in it that you think would lead to action by BYU?

[Fair Dinkum]

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

What is in it that you think would lead to action by BYU?

Someone, pretty sure it was John Gee, has turned him into the church,  I’m guessing for the purpose of a membership removal meeting ( forget what they call them now) for sharing his views and opinions on this podcast.

Edited July 8, 2020 by Fair Dinkum

[Calm]

Okay, but that doesn’t say what there is about his opinions that is likely to draw action....which is what I am wondering. 

[Fair Dinkum]

1 hour ago, Kenngo1969 said:

Joseph Smith authored a cookbook?  Huh.   Who knew?

I wonder if my testimony would be affected if I were to try any of the recipes?

(Sorry.   Couldn't resist! )

Yup a cookbook.  The Book of EggsBrieHam 

[Fair Dinkum]

10 minutes ago, Calm said:

Okay, but that doesn’t say what there is about his opinions that is likely to draw action....which is what I am wondering. 

BYU doesn’t exactly have the reputation of promoting academic freedom. 

[CA Steve]

30 minutes ago, Calm said:

Good to know. I will take your opinion and churchistrue as my expectations at this point. I am glad to hear he was able to live as his “true self”. I think it sad when people make choices that limit them in such ways though I realize I speak from a place of high privilege since I never had to worry about feeding my kids or having medical insurance (though we did and do worry for several months when our daughter turned 26 and every 3 years since then as we have to get her reapproved on ours).  My husband when he ran into conflict with his employer of 15 years (University of Calgary...they were gutting the program) chose to find a new employer for his last 15.  Thankfully UVU hasn’t done anything he feels in much conflict with, they promised him a new office and didn’t follow through on that, but that is a comfort, not a moral issue. 

Calm.

As far as I remember, nowhere in the interview did he mention anything about his "true self". These are words the OP used, not Hauglid. If you could listen to the interview, I think you would find that he did exactly that and ended up getting criticized for it publicly. It seems for some, the acceptance of the missing scroll theory is a test of faith.

[CA Steve]

1 hour ago, Robert F. Smith said:

Actually, Hauglid told us what he thought already last year, including on this board.  There is no surprise here, and nothing new.  And the LDS Church did not take preemptive action against him, though it clearly could have.

What would be interesting would be a substantive discussion of his claims (many of which are ad hominem).

Can i assume then, since you labeled his claims "ad hominem", that you have listened to the podcast?

If so, would you like to respond to Hauglid's criticism of the use by Gee of the Haven and Blanchard accounts in Dr. Gee's Introduction to the Book of Abraham. to try and establish that the Book of Abraham came from the "long roll"? I have reviewed both of those citations and Hauglid is dead on with his criticism. There is no link and there was no long roll connected with the BoA based on those citations.

Edited July 8, 2020 by CA Steve

[Fair Dinkum]

3 minutes ago, CA Steve said:

Calm.

As far as I remember, nowhere in the interview did he mention anything about his "true self". These are words the OP used, not Hauglid. If you could listen to the interview, I think you would find that he did exactly that and ended up getting criticized for it publicly. It seems for some, the acceptance of the missing scroll theory is a test of faith.

Yes “True Self” is my interpretation.  He did purposely wait to be interviewed until after he officially retired, I speculated that he didn’t feel safe to express his true self and feelings until after he retired.

[Kenngo1969]

32 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Someone, pretty sure it was John Gee, has turned him into the church,  I’m guessing for the purpose of a membership removal meeting ( forget what they call them now) for sharing his views and opinions on this podcast.

Do you have a source, and/or any additional information?

[Kenngo1969]

24 minutes ago, Fair Dinkum said:

Yup a cookbook.  The Book of EggsBrieHam 

Clever!  Very clever!